Pere Marquette high speed?

[tadman]

Also, someone cited the Janesville train and the Louisville train as an example of a failure. That's wrong. They were a M&E play, not a passenger play, and when M&E got the boot, so did those trains.

[CSX_CO]

In real estate, its location, location, location.
In passenger transport, its time, time, time.

Let alone trying to work with CSX and NS to find a spot to run your additional passenger train. Trains are scheduled, and you can't just throw another train into the mix. There is planning involved...

In passenger transport it is "value" over travel time. If "time, time, time" was the whole reason to travel, then we'd all have personal helicopters and heliports everywhere. That would be the fastest and most flexible way to get somewhere.

The ability to go to a specific location, when you want to go, is the reason why the railroads started falling out of favor by the 1920's. Interurbans in the midwest paralleled most of the major lines, and offered more frequent service than the steam roads. People got used to going where they wanted, in shorter spans of time. Then comes the automobile, and suddenly you don't have to wait for someone else to take you, YOU can decide where/when you travel to.

Practice Safe CSX

[CSX_CO]

I've pondered the though several times that maybe they could establish a connection from Amtrak and CSX in MI city to the South Shore then use those tracks to reach Chicago. Complete double track the whole way, maybe expand to tripe track in other places.

Um...have you ever ridden the CSS&SB into Chicago? It goes to Randolph Street station. That is a SEVERAL block walk to Union Station, and an even FURTHER walk to CNW station. The nice thing about AMTRAK to Chicago Union is METRA (outside of stuff bound for the UP lines) is right there in the same building. Going to Randolph Street would require a cab ride to the other stations. Great for the access to the Museums, not so great for access to the other rail lines into and out of Chicago. Only the IC electrics call on Randolph. Metra Rock Island service leaves from another building too. From Kesington on in you're at the mercy of the CN on the former IC too...

Practice Safe CSX

[J T]

I've pondered the though several times that maybe they could establish a connection from Amtrak and CSX in MI city to the South Shore then use those tracks to reach Chicago. Complete double track the whole way, maybe expand to tripe track in other places.

Um...have you ever ridden the CSS&SB into Chicago? It goes to Randolph Street station. That is a SEVERAL block walk to Union Station, and an even FURTHER walk to CNW station.

Yeah, but......you might get to see 200 trains a day!!

[ns8401]

I've pondered the though several times that maybe they could establish a connection from Amtrak and CSX in MI city to the South Shore then use those tracks to reach Chicago. Complete double track the whole way, maybe expand to tripe track in other places.

Um...have you ever ridden the CSS&SB into Chicago? It goes to Randolph Street station. That is a SEVERAL block walk to Union Station, and an even FURTHER walk to CNW station.

Yeah, but......you might get to see 200 trains a day!!

Can we do that can we?

[NoviRailfan]

I rode the PM this past week, leaving from Holland on Wednesday and coming back last night. From what I could see, Holland accounted for a good chunk of the traffic getting on and off the train. The parking lot was beyond overflowing. I don't know if this is the normal state of things at that stop or if this was due to holiday traffic. But from what I saw of passengers getting on at Holland and off in Chicago, I didn't see many people who looked like they were doing a business trip.

I suspect that Amtrak has this pegged as a route for those vacationing or who are taking the train because they can't afford or can't justify the cost of flying to Chicago. For that crowd, there's no need for the train to get to Chicago before noon. I overheard that the Saturday night train coming back was sold out but is that a regular occurrence on that train?

[Saturnalia]

I rode the PM this past week, leaving from Holland on Wednesday and coming back last night. From what I could see, Holland accounted for a good chunk of the traffic getting on and off the train. The parking lot was beyond overflowing. I don't know if this is the normal state of things at that stop or if this was due to holiday traffic. But from what I saw of passengers getting on at Holland and off in Chicago, I didn't see many people who looked like they were doing a business trip.

I suspect that Amtrak has this pegged as a route for those vacationing or who are taking the train because they can't afford or can't justify the cost of flying to Chicago. For that crowd, there's no need for the train to get to Chicago before noon. I overheard that the Saturday night train coming back was sold out but is that a regular occurrence on that train?

Wow--sold out PM? Holland does tend to be pretty busy. Every now and again they go from 3 cars to 5, including some times NOT assoc. with holidays, but almost every holiday has the train extended to at least 5 supers.

[NoviRailfan]

Both PMs that we rode had 5 Superliner coaches. The train back last night was packed. They were forced to stack our luggage in one of the bathrooms.

[Saturnalia]

Both PMs that we rode had 5 Superliner coaches. The train back last night was packed. They were forced to stack our luggage in one of the bathrooms.

Maybe Amtrak should go to Meijer and buy some more cabbage!
Looks like its about time to add a baggage car full-time

[NoviRailfan]

I don't know how Amtrak works the baggage check on that train. We were carrying our luggage on with us. It took at least 15 minutes to unload the train in Holland. Made for fun times for those who got stuck waiting at the crossing next to the station.

[Saturnalia]

I don't know how Amtrak works the baggage check on that train. We were carrying our luggage on with us. It took at least 15 minutes to unload the train in Holland. Made for fun times for those who got stuck waiting at the crossing next to the station.

I've been meaning to ask that question for awhile: does P370 stick out onto that street normally? It might make sense to time the crossing so it goes up after a minute or two if the train has even just cleared the crossing.
I tried to chase P371 a few weeks ago, and we got to Holland at 8:23----BAD IDEA with that crossing just clearing up

[SD80MAC]

Yes, 370 and 371 usually block the crossing when stopped in Holland. When I rode it back in March it also had 5 Superliners. Every time I've ridden it, it's either nearly full or sold out.

Checked baggage on the PM goes in Coach/Baggage Superliner which is usually at the front of 371/rear of 370.

[NoviRailfan]

Thanks. I was wondering about that. The crossing was completely blocked last night.

[C30-7A]

Okay, time for some clarification:
There is NO checked baggage on ANY of the trains in Michigan. Once upon a time, cabbages were used, but the height is higher than that of a baggage car, which made them a giant pain to load and unload. I understand that they are sometimes still loaded, but generally, they are not to be used for baggage anymore.
Having checked baggage, then, requires a baggage car and, just as importantly, AGENTS in stations to check, load and unload the bags and parcels. As of right now, having checked baggage service on the Pere Marquette at all is impossible because there are no agents at any of the stations. This will hopefully change with the opening of the new Vern Ehlers station in Grand Rapids, but not unless MDOT ponies up the money to pay it. The other trains in Michigan, the Blue Water and Wolverine service trains, COULD have checked baggage with all of the agents (and in fact, the Detroit trains used to run with baggage cars) but Amtrak, in their infinite wisdom, will not do this. It's a shame, too, because there are plenty of agents on both routes who could do this work and it would be a guaranteed way to increase ridership. A valid argument for not having the service is baggage car availability, which has shrunk over the last few years, but this won't be so valid after the delivery of the new Viewliner II baggage cars in the not-so-distant future.
For now, baggage on these trains is limited to only what a passenger can physically bring onto the them self, which as stated by SD80MAC is stored in baggage racks in the superliners or in the overhead racks above your seat on all cars.

[NoviRailfan]

Thanks for clarifying that. I was wondering how checked baggage could have gotten off and on the train with no station agent. Also, as you noted, that's quite a lift to get baggage up to the level of those old F40PHs.

At Holland, a worker for the bus system (Macatawa Area Express) was in the station area before the train arrived. He tried to provide some assistance to people but reported that the train was going to be late by 15 minutes when it actually arrived on-time. Oops! Overall, the Holland station is nice but the planning for the station platform and parking doesn't seem to have been well-designed. Not knowing the history of that location, I'm guessing they did the best with what they had and since it's only one train a day, it's probably not that big a deal. But it seems that it would have made more sense to have the platform extend further north in the Grand Rapids direction.

[SD80MAC]

As soon as I wrote that response, I knew it was wrong. I got thinking about how I've never seen or heard anything about checked baggage on the PM. He's right, there isn't any. All the luggage is either in the Coach/Baggage or on the luggage racks at the bottom of each Superliner (or above your seat).

[Typhoon]

Also, someone cited the Janesville train and the Louisville train as an example of a failure. That's wrong. They were a M&E play, not a passenger play, and when M&E got the boot, so did those trains.

No it is not wrong. The statement was this: "ALL of Amtrak's new corridors started in the last 20 years have been smashing successes." Notice the word all. They were a new corridor that failed, regardless of the reasons for them.

[C30-7A]

Also, someone cited the Janesville train and the Louisville train as an example of a failure. That's wrong. They were a M&E play, not a passenger play, and when M&E got the boot, so did those trains.

No it is not wrong. The statement was this: "ALL of Amtrak's new corridors started in the last 20 years have been smashing successes." Notice the word all. They were a new corridor that failed, regardless of the reasons for them.

I guess I should have put a note to exclude those trains because they were, as stated, a Mail & Express idea and were not set up in the interests of passengers. Had they been, they probably would have worked.
And even if you include these trains, the fact that the vast majority of corridor trains have been huge successes still serves to emphasize my point that people WOULD ride a train from Grand Rapids to Lansing and the Detroit area if it were to be started.
Grand Rapids-Lansing-Detroit is a travel market. People may not be screaming for a train, but if one were to show up, they would ride it. The majority of corridor trains in other states has PROVEN this.

[CSX_CO]

Grand Rapids-Lansing-Detroit is a travel market. People may not be screaming for a train, but if one were to show up, they would ride it. The majority of corridor trains in other states has PROVEN this.

Yeah, but how many people, and with how much subsidizing?

AMTRAK is always going to be a money loser. I would rather see money spent on corridors that have the potential for ridership increases through increased train frequency or speed upgrades, rather than throwing money on a 'what-if'?

Practice Safe CSX

[C30-7A]

Grand Rapids-Lansing-Detroit is a travel market. People may not be screaming for a train, but if one were to show up, they would ride it. The majority of corridor trains in other states has PROVEN this.

Yeah, but how many people, and with how much subsidizing?

AMTRAK is always going to be a money loser. I would rather see money spent on corridors that have the potential for ridership increases through increased train frequency or speed upgrades, rather than throwing money on a 'what-if'?

Practice Safe CSX

Okay, don't even start with "Amtrak loses money."
THEY ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO MAKE MONEY. No form of public transportation is. Highways and airlines don't and they get massive subsidies. On that alone, your argument is invalid.
Furthermore, the subsidies you do pay are very cheap compared to everything else the government spends money on. In 2010, the highway system cost the U.S. Government $40 Billion - more than Amtrak has gotten in its entire 40 year existence. And consider this: because people must pay, Amtrak makes up some of that tiny little $1.5 billion subsidy every year and pays it back, although in the end some money isn't recovered. How much do highways bring back? ZERO.
Now having made the above points, sometimes passenger trains CAN fit into the capitalist scheme of things. What's an example? Why our own Pere Marquette and Blue Water! Ridership on both trains is strong enough that they make a profit ABOVE the $7.1 million subsidy (PENNIES!) that the State of Michigan pays for them. Adding another train would bump the cost to about $10 million, but all three trains would generate enough ridership and revenue that even this increase would probably be made up.
It's like I said, people aren't screaming for this train, but old saying holds and has been proven countless times: If you build it, they will come.